Spurlock v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.

76 Mo. 67
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided October 15, 1882·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Hough, J.

This suit was decided by the circuit court in favor of the defendant, on the ground that the matters now in issue were considered and decided in favor of the defendant in a former suit between the same parties. The judgment in the former suit is stated to be one of non-suit. The pleadings in that case are preserved in the transcript before us, but neither the rulings of the court upon which the judgment of non-suit was based, nor the judgment itself appear in the record. It may be that the .former judgment is a bar to a recovery in the present action, but a plea of res judicata should he supported by proof that the matters in issue and decided in the first suit, are the same as that presented for determination in the second, as neither the circuit court nor this court can take, judicial notice of such matters. Banks v. Burnam, 61 Mo 77; Kelly v. Hurt, 61 Mo. 463. The judgment of the circuit court must, therefore, be reversed and the cause remanded.

All the judges concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Spurlock v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co., 76 Mo. 67 (Mo. 1882).

76 Mo. 67 (Spurlock v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Arata v. Monsanto Chemical Company
351 S.W.2d 717 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1961)
Bohannon v. Camden Bend Drainage District
208 S.W.2d 794 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1948)
Wickum v. Arneson
249 N.W. 709 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1933)
State ex rel. St. Joseph Water Co. v. Eastin
192 S.W. 1006 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1917)
American Hardwood Lumber Co. v. Nickey
89 Mo. App. 270 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1901)